“It really pisses me off,” Clark said while standing in the plaza in front of the Flatiron Building on Fifth Avenue, a few blocks south of the dueling skyscrapers. “The whole New York skyline has been destroyed. When I moved here I was thrilled with it, and now it’s just getting disgusting. These new buildings have no identity, no design to them. We’ve lost the character of New York, and it breaks my heart.” — The Guardian
The Guardian goes inside some locals' struggle against the new 262 Fifth Avenue condo tower by Meganom and SLCE Architects. The East Siders protesting their obstructed view sheds are also not in favor of its appearance or the design for 432 Park Avenue, including several inspired teen critics on TikTok.
NYT critic Michael Kimmelman also wrote of their plight last year, declaring theirs and other opposition attempts a noble attempt at restoring the city’s history in an era defined by zoning manipulation and visible inequality.
A preservationist named Jorge Otero-Pailos told Kimmelman last October that new regulations are needed to “guarantee a collective experience, a sense of shared identity and civic meaning, which can bind New Yorkers across generations and centuries.”
11 Comments
can't help but imagine the very same comments were made each time a tall building was put up since the age of tall buildings began.
Is this really equivalent to the Equitable Building (legendary source of the NY zoning law)? Somehow it feels like it isn't the tipping point problem of our time. But you never know. Perhaps the problem of the pretty fucking rich losing their awesome view due to the intrusion of the homes of the "omg, does that much money even exist" rich will be the thing that finally flips the script...
Your point would make sense if people didn't assign aesthetic value to buildings or cities which is empirically obvious . I'm pretty sure the aesthetic qualities of the Empire State building are visible to more people than just the "pretty fucking rich".
I dont think people think that much about the aesthetics of buildings truth be told. I'm not belittling the general public by saying that, it's just that the world is complicated enough and frightening enough that the assignment of aesthetic values to buildings is probably not a priority for anyone other than those who make money from the business of doing so.
In any case, the article mostly focuses on how the view from one high priced apartment has been lost because of the new stuff. It's hard to take seriously. People thought the Eiffel tower was shit when it was erected. This feels much the same. NY is a city built on constant change and the vibe comes from the willingness to not make the city into a museum, for both good and bad.
If the article was about 100,000 people gathering to demonstrate against a building (like the Stuttgart station provoked in 2010) then I might be more sympathetic to the premise. But in that case the project by Ingenhoven is stunning beautiful. Which tends to make me think the issue is almost never about what things look like, but what they cost or what they represent. Here the story told is about money fighting more money.
Not much to lament there, even if I agree it sucks that the view to the Empire State was lost a bit from the south.
As a residential architect, I can tell you that people do think about aesthetics a lot, they just don't talk about it because they lack the vocabulary that capital A architects employ, but if you meet them on their ground, you'd be surprised. It requires humility and empathy.
As for cities changing, it's no coincidence that the preservation movement sprang up in the mid sixties when large swaths of the traditional city where being torn down for the banalities of modernist towers, highways, and project buildings. NYC was ok with the 1880's and 1920's building boom because it gave something as good or better than what it took away. This stack of boxes is a one trick pony. People tend to prefer something a little more intelligently/beautifully composed.
As an architect, you need to have the courage to ask these questions and follow the evidence where it takes you, even if it leads you to question the "truths" you where taught in architecture school when they idolized folks like LeCorbusier who advocated for the whole sale destruction of the traditional city. These are not coincidences, whatever style(s) you prefer.
The box at the top is interesting and curious. I assume it is open all the way through and has no function. (Will it make a sound?) It picks up the opening several floors below and makes an abstract statement high up in the sky, complementing or competing against the Empire spire. This is an attractive building.
The photo above is somewhat misleading—the Empire State is five blocks away. But then you have to ask how well we will see this building if more of these go up. And why not? I'm not clear how setback laws work, but if there is demand, it's likely a way will be found. We will get vertical clutter—the towers of Bologna return to mind. I'm also not clear how stable this demand is. How much of its motivation is real demand for luxury condos, how much is sheer speculation? And if the speculative bubble bursts, what will we be left with? Spindly buildings sprinkled throughout the city, an incoherent skyline. King Kong won't know which building to climb.
But for better and mostly for worse, NYC has always been determined by the forces of speculation. The Empire State Building enjoyed its isolation for decades because it was built in an area where there was low demand for development. That changed.
Whatever skyline we get is the one that most expresses New York, whether we like it or not. Perhaps we should change our priorities and not worry about views, or, rather, changing priorities will improve our views. That won't happen, so here we are.
44 bucks to go to the top of the Empire? No way!
i think it's (the box) a trompe l'oeil caused by the "artist's impression" : ) maybe I'm wrong but not sure what purpose it would serve rather than further blocking views from different vantage points
I get that aesthetics are subjective, and that "People thought the Eiffel tower was shit when it was erected." but imagine Paris allowing a bunch of boxy skyscrapers to cloud out the view of the Eiffel tower?
There's a reason they keep the anonymous towers out in La Defense.
Interesting to think about this from different vantage points though (literally). the norman foster/jp morgan megalith that topped out recently, together with the fairly new one vanderbilt , have also been intruding on the presence of empire state within midtown skyline when seen from the Hudson side. Madelon Vriesendorp paintings definitely come to mind.. Not saying change is not or should not be inevitable, but this decade is becoming the one where presence of Empire state in Manhattan skyline is perhaps finally coming to an anti climactic end. Thanks to it's location in Nomad, and bulk in proportion to what's been going on around it, Empire state for almost a century kept it's presence in NYC skyline, easily identifiable, almost as a primordial marker, that stood far enough from the supertalls of billionaires row or the mess that is hudson yards - but the fate seems to be finally catching up, the gridiron and it's existential speculative fuel closing in, at last.
Many cities have “Protected Views” such as London since the 1930’s of views of St Paul’s Cathedral from numerous agreed locations, Edinburgh, Scotland has over 160 protected views within the city and even some North American cities such as San Francisco, Portland and Vancouver have some views listed in their Urban Design General Plan or View Protection Plans or Guidelines of built or natural features to protect during future development. Having worked on architectural built projects in London and Edinburgh, I don’t recall there being any special protected views for individual homeowners from their living room… but then again neither London or Edinburgh would have allowed the Empire State Building to be built in their city in the early 1930’s… so be thankful New York you have this great iconic building even if you have to get off your couch to see it…
That box, in fact, is an observation deck for residents and their guests. They should have a very nice view of the Empire State indeed.
https://www.slcearch.com/project/262-fifth-avenue/
Might be cool if they put a wind turbine in there. Could be an idea for some green energy.
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.